An Investigation of the Effectiveness and Validity of Planning Time in Speaking Test Tasks

The study described in this article investigated the relationship between three variables in the IELTS oral module—planning, proficiency, and task—and was designed to enhance our understanding of how or whether these variables interact. The study aimed to determine whether differences in performance resulted from 1 or 2 min of planning time. It also aimed to identify the most effective strategies used by candidates in their planning. Ninety candidates, in two groups—intermediate and advanced—each undertook three tasks with either 1 or 2 min planning time or none. All tasks were rated by two raters, and the transcripts of the speech samples subjected to a discourse analysis. Neither the analysis of the scores nor the discourse analysis revealed any significant differences in performance according to the amount of planning time provided. Although this suggests that planning time does not positively advantage candidates, we argue that 1 min of pretask planning should be considered as an option in the test development process in the interests of fairness and to enhance the face validity of the test. The study concludes with a discussion of possible reasons for our null findings and proposes avenues for further research.

[1]  L. Ortega.  3. What do learners plan?: Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning , 2005 .

[2]  L. Ortega.  PLANNING AND FOCUS ON FORM IN L2 ORAL PERFORMANCE , 1999, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[3]  Xiaoming Xi.  Do visual chunks and planning impact performance on the graph description task in the SPEAK exam? , 2005 .

[4]  P. Skehan.  语言学习认知法 = A cognitive approach to language learning , 1998 .

[5]  Alan Tonkyn,et al.  Measuring spoken language: a unit for all reasons , 2000 .

[6]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer Variability in Oral Proficiency Interviews , 2005 .

[7]  R. Ellis,et al.  The Effects of Pre‐Task Planning and On‐Line Planning on Fluency, Complexity and Accuracy in L2 Monologic Oral Production , 2003 .

[8]  Gillian Wigglesworth.  Issues in the Development of Oral Tasks for Competency-based Assessments of Second Language Performance , 2000 .

[9]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer style and candidate performance in the IELTS oral interview , 1998 .

[10]  V. Samuda,et al.  Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. , 2005 .

[11]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency , 2003 .

[12]  Noriko Iwashita,et al.  Estimating the difficulty of oral proficiency tasks: what does the test-taker have to offer? , 2002 .

[13]  Gillian Wigglesworth,et al.  An investigation of the effectiveness and validity of planning time in part 2 of the IELTS Speaking Test , 2006 .

[14]  Gillian Wigglesworth,et al.  Influences on performance in task-based oral assessments , 2001 .

[15]  Gillian Wigglesworth,et al.  An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse , 1997 .

[16]  Pauline Foster,et al.  Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance , 1997 .

[17]  M. Swain.  The output hypothesis : Just speaking and writing aren't enough , 1993 .

[18]  Rod Ellis,et al.  Planning and task performance in a second language , 2005 .

[19]  John N. Wendel.  Planning and second-language narrative production , 1997 .

[20]  Noriko Iwashita,et al.  Can We Predict Task Difficulty in an Oral Proficiency Test? Exploring the Potential of an Information‐Processing Approach to Task Design , 2001 .

[21]  Uta Mehnert,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT LENGTHS OF TIME FOR PLANNING ON SECOND LANGUAGE PERFORMANCE , 1998, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[22]  Peter Skehan,et al.  The Influence of Planning and Task Type on Second Language Performance , 1996, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[23]  R. Ellis.  Interlanguage Variability in Narrative Discourse: Style Shifting in the Use of the Past Tense , 1987, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.